Comment: So You're A Skeptic ...

(See in situ)

In post: I'm a Skeptic

So You're A Skeptic ...

... Are you then skeptical of who is behind the shift in the burden of proof when bizarre theories prevail as the conventional consensus of received wisdom among explanations of events?

THE PENTAGON, for example: The most secure building on the planet ... blah, blah, blah ... clean 16 foot hole, suppressed crime scene evidence. 'Inside Job' is the inescapable circumstantial conclusion to be drawn by anyone who approaches the facts skeptically assessing theories of outside complicity that just don't add up. A skeptic might ask ' who is offering the explanation; on what basis; and why ?'

Likewise, FINANCIAL SYSTEM RIGGED AT THE TOP: Too confusing to run the numbers, ... then run the letters and see how the decimals connect --FED; CIA; SEC; COMEX; PPT; DTCC ... On the subject of connections, how do you relate -- Goldman, Morgan, Treasury, FED, etc, to the institutionalized corrupt manipulations which operate with impunity above any law. Such blatantly illegal practices as naked short sales, insider trading, and derivatives shuffles defy any enforcement scrutiny as these practices are suborned by the very agencies ostensibly charged with preventing abuses. Is it really left field to suggest the system has been co-opted ?

Was it just coincidence that caused the suspicious options trading in key airlines stocks preceeding 9/11? Was it coincidence that decided such suspicious events required no further investigation nor mainstream disclosure?

No I would suggest a true skeptic would at least pause in the face of such incredible OFFICIAL THEORIES to inquire -- 'cui bono ?' .... and at least hold the party proffering such burden shifting explanations convenient to powers that be to some critical thinking analysis, particularly if the proferring party controls the evidence and declines to be forthcoming.

My Nut Job Theory of skepticism is that disussion of conspiracies should be a focus on questions. The answers I leave to be analyzed as a matter of critical thinking.

Here's the conclusion I suspect my theory will point to :

It's not a conspiracy ... it's a syndrome ... and you're in on it.